why do we continue to protect isreal?

[Shermana]

Still, our costly activities in the Middle East appear to serve Israel's protection, albeit more indirectly than fighting in it's wars.
And why do we do this? Politicians like winning, & the Judeo Christian lobby would turn away non-performers.
We voters are responsible......well, you voters are.

Actually I'd think they serve Saudi Arabia's protection far more. I can't help but notice that when many people say the USA's interest in the Middle East is to back Israel, the words "Saudi Arabia" never seems to be mentioned by them. Where does that put your Judeo-Christian lobby?

 

[Shermana]

The inflammatory movie in question, it is now clear, was actually financed by a radical Christian media group. No Israelis or Jews were involved.

Note how I do not take this opportunity to blame Christians, Christianity, Christian politicians, or Christian countries for annoying the Muslims. Because making sweeping generalizations like that would be offensive, especially with me not necessarily knowing everything there is to know about either the situation in question or the history of Christian influence in the region, or Christian-Muslim relations, or anything like that.

What I believe is fair game however, is pointing out that it's connected to a Christian charity.

'Innocence Of Muslims' Shot On Hollywood Set, Film Permit Connected To Christian Charity

This only adds to the overflowing bucket of cases where "Christian Charity" is merely a cover for some kind of questionable activity.

Media for Christ, a Duarte, Calif.-based Christian nonprofit group, applied for the film permit, the San Gabriel Valley Tribune reported. The charity's misson statement is to "glow Jesus' light" to the world.

Though Joseph Nassralla, the president of Media for Christ, emerged as a force behind the anti-Muslim film, the organization said it had nothing to do with the project and was upset by its content, according to the L.A. Times. Nassralla has reportedly devoted himself to criticizing Islam in speeches and interviews during recent years.
FilmL.A. Inc. confirmed that "The Innocence of Muslims" was shot in the California county last August, but that the studio did not know the details of the film.
“By law, the content of film projects need not be disclosed in order to apply for or receive a film permit from FilmL.A. Neither FilmL.A. nor its government partners had any foreknowledge of this project’s content, and the release of a film permit can in no way be construed as endorsement or approval of this film,” read a statement from President Paul Audley obtained by the L.A. Times.
Although Sam Bacile (sometimes referred to as Sam Bossil) posted the YouTube video and was thought to be the director, it was later determined that this was just an alias. Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, was identified as the man behind "The Innocence of Muslims," The AP reported Thursday:

Nakoula denied he directed the film and said he knew the self-described filmmaker, Sam Bacile. But the cell phone number that AP contacted Tuesday to reach the filmmaker who identified himself as Sam Bacile traced to the same address near Los Angeles where AP found Nakoula. Federal court papers said Nakoula's aliases included Nicola Bacily, Erwin Salameh and others.​

Nakoula is a Coptic Christian from Cerritos, according to the L.A. Times.
He has also been convicted of financial crimes, according to The AP. In 2010, he pleaded no contest to federal bank fraud charges, after setting up fraudulent accounts with stolen identities and Social Security numbers, in California and was ordered to pay $790,000 in restitution. He was sentenced to 21 months in prison and order to not use computers or the Internet for five years without permission from a probation officer.
Steven Klein, an anti-Islam activist and Vietnam War veteran, acted as a consultant on the film. Klein also has a weekly show on Media for Christ's satellite network, The Way TV, the L.A. Times reported.

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually I'd think they serve Saudi Arabia's protection far more.

I consider the Saudis to be a secondary interest in the region.

I can't help but notice that when many people say the USA's interest in the Middle East is to back Israel, the words "Saudi Arabia" never seems to be mentioned by them. Where does that put your Judeo-Christian lobby?

Jews & Xians like cheap & available gas?

 

[Shermana]

I consider the Saudis to be a secondary interest in the region.

That would be why America totally didn't react to Saddam's launching of Scuds at Israel but totally invaded him when he took Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia.

I can guarantee that if Saudi Arabia wasn't concerned about Iran, there'd be 80% less concern about Iran in American media.

The day that Obama bows to Bibi, then you can call Saudi Arabia a "Secondary" interest. Not like the Saudis own a huge chunk of the Stock exchange either or anything.

Jews & Xians like cheap & available gas?

So do Muslims and Chinese, Japanese and Korean Atheists and Buddhists and Indian Hindus and Scientologists. The whole world likes cheap, available gas. Only 10% of American oil however comes from the Middle East, which could be easily replaced with increased drilling efforts in Alaska. It's not nearly as much of an important factor as most people think. Instead, we should be invading Canada to get them to sell their Shale at a cheaper price, those greedy Canucks!

 

[fallingblood]

That would be why America totally didn't react to Saddam's launching of Scuds at Israel but totally invaded him when he took Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia.

I can guarantee that if Saudi Arabia wasn't concerned about Iran, there'd be 80% less concern about Iran in American media.

The day that Obama bows to Bibi, then you can call Saudi Arabia a "Secondary" interest. Not like the Saudis own a huge chunk of the Stock exchange either or anything.

The problem with Kuwait wasn't about Saudi Arabia being threatened. It was about Iraq controlling too much of the coast line, and thus potentially having too much control of oil shipments and prices.

As for Iran, when a crazy dictator, who potentially could develop nuclear weapons, is in control, there should be concern.

So do Muslims and Chinese, Japanese and Korean Atheists and Buddhists and Indian Hindus and Scientologists. The whole world likes cheap, available gas. Only 10% of American oil however comes from the Middle East, which could be easily replaced with increased drilling efforts in Alaska. It's not nearly as much of an important factor as most people think. Instead, we should be invading Canada to get them to sell their Shale at a cheaper price, those greedy Canucks!

Actually, maintaining our oil buying from the Middle East is important for the reason that it helps maintain a handle on China. It is strategic actually, as we also help fluctuate oil prices, keep an eye on potential competitors, and also help fuel growth in those areas (or at least try).

Also, it is easy oil. The oil in much of North America simply, until relatively recently, has been hard to drill at. We can look at Western North Dakota, and see that the standard practices of tapping into the oil simply wasn't very effective, nor cheap.

 

[Revoltingest]

That would be why America totally didn't react to Saddam's launching of Scuds at Israel but totally invaded him when he took Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia.
I can guarantee that if Saudi Arabia wasn't concerned about Iran, there'd be 80% less concern about Iran in American media.
The day that Obama bows to Bibi, then you can call Saudi Arabia a "Secondary" interest. Not like the Saudis own a huge chunk of the Stock exchange either or anything.

I'm going by political discourse here. People care greatly about Israel, but not the Saudis.
And politicians care about what people care about when it affects their ability to hold office.

So do Muslims and Chinese, Japanese and Korean Atheists and Buddhists and Indian Hindus and Scientologists. The whole world likes cheap, available gas.

I never meant to imply otherwise.
It was just a snappy answer to your question.

Only 10% of American oil however comes from the Middle East, which could be easily replaced with increased drilling efforts in Alaska. It's not nearly as much of an important factor as most people think. Instead, we should be invading Canada to get them to sell their Shale at a cheaper price, those greedy Canucks!

As much as I despise those loathsome poutine eaters in Canuckistan, I see no reason to invade.

 

[Lady B]

Ok Now that I have calmed down, taken a short break let me try to clarify my post/ posts. I have had an ongoing friendly relationship with many Muslims in Egypt, Jordan,Syria for several years now.We all have a respectful camaraderie and try to handle current issues with truth and rationale. My problem is what I have noticed over the years and many conversations or debates is Their common view that the USA should let Israel go and stop protecting them.

My personal views as a Christian American is of a Biblical standpoint.God loves Israel, God loves His Jewish children. Therefore If The Usa helps keep Israel safe from her enemy's, I must agree.
However surely this is not the American agenda, to protect for Biblical reasons, so what is Americas interest in Israel really?

Egypt does not see the benefits of the peace treaty swaying towards them, They are itching now to reform the treaty and hope Morsey will back them. I have heard many comments regarding this and how Americans paid this 1.3 billion a year to keep Mubarik in our pockets and under control and now that he is gone They do not need or want American influence at all.

When I began this thread I was just in shock. I apologize for the nonsense you see in my posts.I just would like to hear rational minds and unbiased opinions on a few questions that I personally hear on at least a weekly basis.

1-What interests does America have in Israel and why do we continue to protect it from its many enemy's in the middle east?
2- If America takes it's protection from Israel what do you see would happen in regards to her enemy's and those who seek to reclaim their land that Israel allegedly stole from them?
3-Does anyone interpret that this hatred for Israel in many middleast countries stems from a Islamic hatred of Jews?

That is my questions about Israel, now I tell you how this controversial film was even involved in my thread. Wednesday was the first I heard about this anti-Muslim film. I heard it from an Egyptian Muslim friend through a text. This was the text I was sent " Now B do you see what your freedoms do to others?" and then I was given the link to their media responding to this film. A short while later I received in Yahoo a text stating Usa needs to let go of Israel and stop protecting the Jews that go and incite the Muslim religion.
I was in shock that they immediately went to their biased, most common argument against The USA for this film? After I realized what was happening all over the middleast and the protests and murder of innocent men , The burning of our flag, the violence. Well I am very upset as we all must be, and I am trying hard to put this into rationale thinking and see all viewpoints.

So If you all can help in that I would appreciate your imput.

 

[Caladan]

1-What interests does America have in Israel and why do we continue to protect it from its many enemy's in the middle east?

America did not always support Israel energetically. America had serious doubts about Israel the small young state who was at odds with numerous nations around it. Only after Israel's remarkable military achievements did America begin to channel more attention to Israel.
Even then the main American policy in the Middle East was the 'Two pillars' policy, in which Saudi Arabia and Iran, two countries with rich oil reserves... and not Israel played the leading role.
The US invested great sums of money and its best arms to support Saudi Arabia and Iran to expend its influence and to repel the Soviet Union from the region, and in addition to secure the oil of the Middle East. Only after the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979 this policy came to an end, and Israel took a leading role instead of Iran (which BTW was an ally to Israel until the time of the Islamic revolution).

2- If America takes it's protection from Israel what do you see would happen in regards to her enemy's and those who seek to reclaim their land that Israel allegedly stole from them?

America's 'protection' is more of a cooperation than protection. Israel has established itself in the region a long time ago. No Middle Eastern country considers to cleanse the Middle East of Israel anymore after Israel's neighbouring nations have been bitterly defeated militarily by her.
America's support for Israel functions on many levels. The countries cooperate in intelligence gathering, technology, democratic values, etc. I don't think you will find the same social and political platform in other Middle Eastern nations that you find in Israel, the nation with the longest functional multi party system in a region with a deeply rooted history of dictatorships.

3-Does anyone interpret that this hatred for Israel in many middleast countries stems from a Islamic hatred of Jews?

A deeply rooted hatred for Jews and Israel is very evident on the Middle Eastern streets, media, and has also been dominating the political leaderships of some of the most notable nations around Israel. For decades Arab leaders have literally promised to their citizens to 'throw the Jews into the sea'. Today thankfully, there is a standing peace treaty between Egypt and Israel (and Jordan), so hopefully with time realistic political relations will resume and sink in to the general public, although I have my doubts about the latter.

 

[Rakhel]

" Now B do you see what your freedoms do to others?"

This is the statement that confuses me the most.
It just doesn't make sense.
What do "your freedoms" have to do with his choice to accuse you of something you had no knowledge of and had nothing to do with?

 

[Pastek]

3-Does anyone interpret that this hatred for Israel in many middleast countries stems from a Islamic hatred of Jews?

No. That's because of Israel that some people started to hate them. But it is not an "Islamic teaching."
1-The prophet Muhammad married a jew.
2- It's possible for a muslim to mary a jew.
3 - Moses is in almost half of the Qu'ran.

What we can say, is that there was -until recently- many dictators in the muslims countries, and they used a lot the "Israel/jewish" hatred card.
And Medias were controled by those regime.

Of course, for the muslims Israel have nothing to do in that part of the region.
But now, the time passed and people in general are tired of this situation.
Many muslims accepted the fact that Israel is now here, that Us will protect this state and that we must make a step to peace.
They are not happy with this situation, but they prefer a peaceful solution.

And if you want to know what muslims thinks about the US-Israel relation, they think that US use Israel to have "an eye" in the Middle east.

Like they promise them many things for having their money to be reelected.

 

[Lady B]

This is the statement that confuses me the most.
It just doesn't make sense.
What do "your freedoms" have to do with his choice to accuse you of something you had no knowledge of and had nothing to do with?

Yes I can agree, but I must quote him accurately. I can tell you what the background to this was, but it is still irrational to me also.

My friend is from Egypt and throughout our years of speaking he has tried to attack our first amendment rights and blame this for the immorality that he sees or interprets through means of media, movies and contacts in the U.S. I adamantly disagree and uphold our freedoms at every turn.

Now he conveniently uses our freedom of speech rights to place blame on America for this slanderous film that has in his view, incited Muslims to these violent acts.

Unfortunately He is not alone in this and since Wednesday has relentlessly baited me to discuss his ridiculous views. I will not allow him or anyone to justify their violent reactions and blame a "freedom" for an abuse.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some news relating to US defense of Israel.....
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike - Telegraph

 

[Lady B]

Some news relating to US defense of Israel.....
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike - Telegraph

interesting...thank you

 

[Shermana]

Some news relating to US defense of Israel.....
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike - Telegraph

What next, now Britain is just trying to defend Israel and otherwise has no interest in Iran herself?

 

[fallingblood]

What next, now Britain is just trying to defend Israel and otherwise has no interest in Iran herself?

Or maybe, all of these nations are trying to make sure that this narrow strait is not blockaded, and thus screw up oil shipments and cause great harm in many nations. That is what the article states, and it makes quite a bit of logical sense.

 

[Shermana]

Or maybe, all of these nations are trying to make sure that this narrow strait is not blockaded, and thus screw up oil shipments and cause great harm in many nations. That is what the article states, and it makes quite a bit of logical sense.

Exactly. It's got about .1% to do with protecting Israel and 99.9% to do with ensuring the safety of Hormuz.

 

[fallingblood]

Exactly. It's got about .1% to do with protecting Israel and 99.9% to do with ensuring the safety of Hormuz.

Okay, I misinterpreted what you meant. It seems like we stand in agreement here.

 

[Caladan]

Some news relating to US defense of Israel.....
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike - Telegraph

Because of course western powers never-ever had any interest or presence in the Middle East. :no:

 

[Yerda]

Mainly protecting Israel?

I was thinking more along the lines of oil.

 

[Caladan]

I was thinking more along the lines of oil.

Britain was intensely involved in the Middle East long before Israel ever became a state. Much of the geographical division and today's ethnic tensions in the Middle East are traced to British and colonial presence in the region.